Live data from Hacker News

Google Plans to Deprecate FTP URL Support in Chrome

pulltech.net

311–320 of 350 posts

Re: Google Plans to Deprecate FTP URL Support in Chrome

#311

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Google is optimizing its browser for the majority, chrome is not a power-user browser. Yet they are positioning it as the only browser

This'll happen when the major ideology held by most people is competition . One wouldn't expect Google to say "We recommend you use our browser, Google Chrome, but there's also these others that work fine to." It's probably the case that back when the number of internet users was smaller the place had a more community oriented vibe, whereas now there is huge sums of money and power at stake.

I wouldn’t expect Google to say ‘here’s our web app, it doesn’t work properly in any browser expect Chrome’. But they do.

Re: Google Plans to Deprecate FTP URL Support in Chrome

#312

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Have they fixed the issue with excessive resource consumption when using Firefox on a Retina MacBook?

+1 I tried to switch to FF on multiple occasions, but it's a CPU hog on MacBook. Why is this issue ignored for so long?

Based on what I saw the last time I checked Mozilla's bug tracker, the issue has a low priority and no one is actively working to resolve it.

From what I understand, it's a low level rendering issue.

Re: Google Plans to Deprecate FTP URL Support in Chrome

#313
post #242

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Nah. Average consumers almost never touch ftp anymore. I'm a tech pro and even I haven't used ftp in years. Having ftp servers accessible from a browser is a fairly useless luxury at this point. Dedicated ftp clients are very easy to come by for anyone.

> I'm a tech pro and even I haven't used ftp in years. That's why you haven't. Ask regular non-tech people doing office jobs in non-tech companies. Some FTP use will show up. Random example I've seen recently: a sports clothing vendor giving seasonal copy bundles for marketing posters to its partners via a password-protected FTP server.

Time to bust out FileZilla again!

Re: Google Plans to Deprecate FTP URL Support in Chrome

#314

Good. Honestly it was always weird to me that browsers ever supported FTP in the first place, it seemed so arbitrary. (Why not gopher and telnet too?) You'll still be able to download an ftp: link by your browser opening your local FTP client, same as a magnet: opening your local torrenting client -- as it should be. And honestly, if you're one of the few people who actually need to regularly download files with FTP,…

Early browsers did in fact support gopher. (some still do)

Re: Google Plans to Deprecate FTP URL Support in Chrome

#315

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm surprised the article claims there are still bugs, because one would think (hope) that a protocol over 30 years old with an implementation over a decade old should've received its last bugfix long ago and become truly stable by now.

What? Like OpenSSL: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heartbleed (I mean, I'm not overjoyed at the deprecation of FTP support because I used it just yesterday, but let's at least be honest here. The protocol might be decades old but the implementations aren't necessarily, and if they're being actively maintained there's always the possibility of introducing new bugs.)

It was introduced into the software in 2012

That's not the "stable protocol that's been around for decades" situation that FTP is in.

Re: Google Plans to Deprecate FTP URL Support in Chrome

#316
post #264

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Its not just Chrome, Firefox is planning to deprecate it as well ( https://www.bleepingcomputer.com/news/google/chrome-and-fire... ). Relevant Bugzilla ticket ( http://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=85464 )

Not Surprising given Mozilla Stance to duplicate and support everything Google does in a effort to chase relevancy again Mozilla has lost the ability to be an independent protector of the Open Web

By following Chrome every time Google wants to removes access to parts of the web not sufficiently encrypted (to thwart ISP competition for ads and data) or not serving ads (like FTP) Firefox is working to keep Chrome relevant.

It has been going on for years.

Re: Google Plans to Deprecate FTP URL Support in Chrome

#317
post #88

Using Chrome these days is like Internet Explorer in 1999. You are at the mercy of a giant corporation.

The difference is that IE in 1999 was made by a giant corporation that profited from selling software, and not from monetising/tracking/advertising.

Re: Google Plans to Deprecate FTP URL Support in Chrome

#318
post #288

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> They can also just not upgrade their browser, then This is a very silly response. New versions are released with security fixes, not just new features.

They wouldn't be using FTP is they care about security. I don't get why there is so much resistance. It's an old, outdated technology that has to be replaced eventually. Yes, change is always painful. But this isn't like with RSS were the tech provided clear benefits we would loose.

> They wouldn't be using FTP is they care about security.

????

Using FTP doesn't put your computer at increased risk of being hacked.

Not updating your browser _DOES_ put your computer at increased risk of being hacked.

Re: Google Plans to Deprecate FTP URL Support in Chrome

#319

There are 100,000s of resources on publicly accessible FTP servers and the removal of direct access to these files via one of the worlds most used browsers is major blow for information storage and retrieval on the internet. It is obvious that the next FTP related headline we see from Google is when (not, if) they drop FTP links from all Google search results. There's no point them listing FTP urls in the results if…

It reminds me of when they bought the deja archive and wrecked usenet, mixing it up with google groups

Re: Google Plans to Deprecate FTP URL Support in Chrome

#320
post #50

I'm personally fine with this. FTP is a different protocol, just like BitTorrent. It's not part of the modern web, so it's just another loose end to tie up. Even though it will be around for a while, it's not relevant to Chrome's user audience/usecase.

I'm not fine with this. I'm of the mindset that code written 20 years ago should run today. This is a breaking change on a critical piece of internet infrastructure. Google, by nature of operating the most popular web browser, has a moral obligation to the community to provide a stable environment. There are something like 10^9 webpages out there. How many of these will become less accessible because of this change?…

You are considering only one aspect of a complex decision they have made. It costs real people-hours to maintain any software. Is it the best use of the time of some very capable people? Like, they might develop some software instead that will save your life a year from now. Then you would think differently.

We should stop telling others what they SHOULD do. (Crap I just did.) Anyways, why not contact Google and offer them to pay the costs of maintaining every piece of software they ever decide to deprecate? Or just go on and build a better browser if you can.

Post reply on HN